HomeMy WebLinkAboutTract Map 3929 Lot 45 Geotechnical Investigation
I
-I....
.
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
.1
(I
~
Independent _. .
Geo-Environme tal RECEIVED
Gonsultants DEe 1 5 2000
CITY OF TEMECLU:A
ENGINEERING DEPARTMENT
GEOTECHNICAL INVESTIGATION
PROPOSED SINGLE FAMILY RESIDENCE
LOT 45, TRACT 3929
DEL REY ROAD
CITY OF TEMECULA
COUNTY OF RIVERSIDE, CALIFORNIA
(APN 921-212-004)
IGC Project No. 01012
November 14, 2000
FOR
Mr. Mark Birchall
39556 Cedar Circle
Murrieta, California 92583
Consultants
in
Geology
GeotechnicBf Engineering
Hydrogeology
and
Environmental Science
---- --
/\\,1P
~~
~~'J
f1\\\~ . /
~\y /
\J/-'
743 Bergschrund Drive' P.O. Box 1725' Crestline, CA 92325' Phone (909) 338-5902' Fax (909) 338-1583
.,,- - .
~~r-rl-;.,"i:_-~~~~-;~;;tm'''':-~~1~ai::,$~1;f.~;~;.,4~"_-..,,:;_;:6r.~_-,~~;~,:;~~~,~';_iii~'L'___;_ ;-'_'i~_
I
I
I
I
I
1
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
PROFESSIONAL CERTIFICATION
This report has been prepared by the staff and associates of Independent Gee-Environmental
Consultants (IGC) under the professional supervision of:
~ ~ _ ~..- -C
William H. Chu, P.E.
Registered Civil Engineer No. ~1_401.~
, f'~
- ,.0,__"
I F,~ . J
~- v- "
.." , ---....,..,-,..,.;:-:
This report has been prepared solely for use by Mr. Mark. Birchall, and his-designates 'as it
pertains to the geotechnical investigation of the proposed residence on Laf 44;, Tract 3929, Del
Rey Road, Temecula, California. Any reliance on this report by a third pJrtyshall be at such
party's own risk. Our services have been performed in accordance with applicable state and
local ordinances and generally accepted practices in the geosciences. No other warranty,
either expressed or implied, is made.
Michael!. racher, C.E.G.
Engineering Geologist No. 1048
IGC is not responsible or liable for any claims or damages associated with interpretation of
available relevant information. In the event changes to the property occur or additional relevant
information about the property is brought to our attention, our conclusions and
recommendations, as contained in this report, may not be valid unless the changes and/or .
additional relevant information are reviewed and the conclusions of this report are modified or
verified in writing.
IGC. 743 Bergschrund Drive. PO 80% 172S . Crcstline, CA '2325 . Phone & Fu (90') 338-5902
\
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
TABLE OF CONTENTS
1.0 INTRODUCTION ......................................................................................................................................... 3
2.0 PROJECT INFORMATION, PURPOSE AND SCOPE OF SERVICES ...................................................5
2.1 PROJECT INFORMATION ............. ........................ . ............ .... 5
2.2 PURPOSE .......... . ......5
2.3 SCOPE OF SERVICES .................... ........................... ................ ............... ........ 5
2.3.1 Review and Field 1nvestigation............................................................................................................. 5
2.3.2 Laboratory Testing...................................... ......................................... ........................................... ...... 6
2.3.3 Analysis and Report.................................. c... ........................................................................................ 6
3.0 SITE DESCRIPTION................................................................".................................................................. 8
4.0 GEOLOGIC CONDITIONS......................................................................................................................... 9
4.1 REGIONAL GEOLOGy.......................... ....................., .................... ............. ............. 9
4.2 SITE GEOLOGy............................ . ............ . ...., 10
4.3 GROUNDWATER................. ....................... ..................... ..................... .......10
5.0 FAULTING, SEISMICITY AND HAZARDS............................................................................................ 13
5.1 FAULTING......................... ................. .......................... ................ 13
5.2 SEISMICITY.................................... ........................ ............... ................... ..... 13
5.3 SEISMIC LATERAL FORCES FOR ABoYE GRADE STRUCTURES .. ........................... 13
5.4 SECONDARY SEISMIC HAzARDs.................. ..................... ... ............ ............. .... 14
5.4.1 Induced Flooding....... .......... ,.......... ...... ........ ............ ...................... ,...................................................... 14
5.4.2 Induced Landsliding or Rockfalls........................................................................................................... 14
5.4.3 Settlement and Subsidence ..........,.......................................................................................................... 14
5.4.4 Soil Liquefaction and Set/lemenl............................................................................................................ 14
6.0 CONCLUSIONS AND RECOMMENDATIONS ...................................................................................... 15
6.1 SUMMARY.. ........................... ............................ .. 15
6.2 FOUNDATIONS ......................................................................... ............,.. ............... ..................... 15
6.3 LATERAL EARTIl PRESSURES AND RESISTANCE TO LATERAL LOADs.. .......... 16
6.3.1 Permanent Retaining Walls................................................................................................................. 16
6.3.2 Retaining Wall Drainage .......................................,......................,..................................................... 16
6.3.3 Relaining Wall Sac/ifill.......... ....... ...... ......... .................... ..... ............ ............ ................................... ,.. 16
6.3.4 Seismic lateral Forcesfor Above Grade Structures............................................................................. 16
6.4 SETI1.EMENT.... ..................., .................. ................. ............. ............., ....... 19
6.5 MODULUS OF SUBGRADE REACTION... ................. .. ............... .......19
6.6 SLAB-DN"()RADE. ....,............... ............... ................ ................ ............... ................ . ...... 19
6.7 SITE DRAINAGE ....... 20
6.8 SOILCORROSNITY EVALUATION TESTS.................... .............,.. ............. ............................................ 20
6.9 EARTHWORK............. ................ ............ ...21
6.9,1 Clearing, Grubbing and Removal of Unsuitable Materials.........................................,........................ 21
6.9.2 Processing of Natural Soils....... ....................... ................................................................................... 22
6.9.3 Fill Placemenl............,........................................................................................................................ 22
6.10 SLOPES.... ....................... ............. .......23
6.11 TEMPORARY SLOPES. ....................... .....23
6.12 SHRINKAGEANDSUBSIDENCE.. ..................... ........ 24
6.13 EXCAVATABILITY .................... ................... ................ ............... .. ........ 24
6.14 CONSTRUCTION OBSERVATION .... .............. ............... ....... 24
7.0 CLOSURE ................................................................................................................................................... 24
APPENDICES
Field Exploration & Boring Logs A-1
Laboratory Descriptions & Test Resu~s B-1
Fau~ Map and General Grading Specification Figures
2
ICC. 143 Ber&schrund Drive . PO Box 1125 . Crestlinc, CA 92325 . Phone & Fu: (909) 338-5902
'1--
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
GEOTECHNICAL INVESTIGATION
PROPOSED SINGLE FAMILY RESIDENCE
LOT 45, TRACT 3929
DEL REY ROAD
CITY OF TEMECULA
COUNTY OF RIVERSIDE, CALIFORNIA
(APN 921-212-004)
1 0 INTRODUCTION
This report presents the results of a geotechnical investigation of the subject property
performed in October and November of 2000 at the request of Mr. Mark Birchall, the owner of
the property. The location of the property is shown on FIGURE 1, Site Location Map.
The following items were used as references for this evaluation:
. Information obtained through conversations with Mr. Birchall, the owner
of the property;
. A Grading Plan with existing topography prepared by Michael Benesh,
Professional Civil Engineer and Land Surveyor, at a scale of 1 "=20';
. Available published and unpublished Geologic Maps and Literature
which include the site and surrounding areas; and
. Knowledge of the area with regard to local soil, bedrock, and
groundwater conditions.
3
:3
IGC. 143 Bergschrund Drive. PO Box 172S . Crestline, CA 92325 . Phone &. Fu (909) 338.5902
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
f.'.' <'II;'
f:n~-';
~ir }"4-"
<, 6/
l~njl'''' /{
. "'P:,tftg; ~_
':~~~~-~:eR-;;::;,;:{~;":'
. ,,;~,',:.. ,,-~~t -...;~
"~<.i.1
g
'>fJ
..". .0..:"
MY ,It<,t &d21~ _ -.
_".to.. -~.Bvt!!'h/}&
~- -.- ~ 'J::;;
S'
.'-';
<> ;......
~-:'i
I_i
"i~'z"':1i~~~r: ^'
"'''''''
:..:.4m"m'-<_....~
,
i
'V.1W~kf$1'O!
.tl ,,,~-,
-~t~.
<,
;>.
n~t'.z",+'
'~~~~,'-
/t~....~../
f__"__,~f.~
-.......~~;._.~;'?_.
#.)~
..,;. ''-$f$tMU~..
c ~~
;-'>.
~:~
.J;.,o;JIlofi".
?
"'
QUAD.
California - San Bernardino Co.
7.5 minute series (Topo)
SITE LOCATION MAP
FIGURE 1
4
"
IGC. 1.tJ Bergschnmd Drive . PO BOI" 1725 ... Cresdine, CA U32S . Phone &: Fa: (909) 338-5902
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
20 PROJECT INFORMATION PURPOSE AND SCOPE OF SERVICES
2.1 Project Information
The subject site is located on Del Rey Road, one lot east of Avenida Barca and north of Rancho
California Road, in the city of Temecula, Riverside County, California.
Current plans for the proposed development indicate a large single-level structure with an
attached garage, and associated driveway, park.ing, utilities and landscaping. Development is
expected to utilize cut and fill grading to create a level yard and pad area and an access
driveway off of Del Rey Road. The structure is expected to have relatively light foundation loads
and will likely be constructed using continuous foundations and post-tension slabs.
2.2 Purpose
The purpose of our geotechnical services will be to evaluate exposed and subsurface geologic
conditions at the site and to determine the physical properties of soil and bedrock materials
relative to providing geotechnical recommendations for grading, foundations, and retaining wall
design parameters.
In our opinion, special areas of concern at this site include the proposed construction of several
stepped retaining walls.
All our services have been conducted under the supervision of a Registered Engineer and a
Certified Engineering Geologist.
2.3 Scope of Services
The geotechnical investigation included the following scope of services:
1. Review of readily available existing published and unpublished geologic
maps, geotechnical reports and other geotechnical data for the site and
surrounding area;
2. Field investigation of the site through excavation of three exploratory
test pits to depths of up to 10 feet below existing grade;
3. Logging the excavations and collection of representative soil samples;
4. Laboratory testing of representative samples; and
5. Geotechnical analyses and preparation of this report.
2.3.1 Review and Field Investigation
This investigation included a review of readily available published and unpublished
geologic maps, geotechnical reports and other geotechnical data for the site and
surrounding area.
5
.-
.::>
IGC. 143 Bergschrund Drive. PO Box 172S . Crcltlinc, CA 92325 . Phone &: Fax (909) 338-5902
I
I
I
I
I
1
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
The field portion of the investigation included the excavation of three exploratory test pits
using a tractor mounted backhoe to dig to depths of between 8 and 15 feet below the
existing ground surface. Results of the excavations revealed that layers of topsoil andl
or slopewash soil overly the bedrock across the area of the site. The depths and
locations of the excavations were chosen to verify estimated subsurface conditions.
Locations of the explorations are shown on FIGURE 2, Exploratory Excavation Location
Plan. Logs of the excavations are presented in Appendix A.
2.3.2 Laboratory Testing
During the excavation operations, an engineering geologist was on site to log the
excavations and obtain representative bulk and relatively undisturbed samples for
geotechnical laboratory testing. The actual laboratory tests performed included:
. Field Moisture Content and in-place Density;
. Maximum Density-Optimum Moisture Relationships;
. Expansion Test;
. Consolidation Tests;
. Direct shear Testing of representative soil samples.
. Soil Corrosivity Test.
A complete description of the laboratory testing procedures and the actual laboratory
test results are presented in Appendix 8.
2.3.3 Analysis and Report
The data obtained from the field exploration and laboratory testing was used in analyzing
the subsurface conditions at the project site, and in developing engineering design
recommendations presented in this report, which includes the following information:
.
Review ofthe project information;
.
Review of field exploration and laboratory testing data, including
logs of the excavations and results of laboratory tests;
.
Discussions regarding general geologic surface and subsurface
conditions at the site and in the area at the time of the
exploration;
.
Recommended mitigation measures, remedial and mass
grading requirements, and applicable geotechnical design
parameters;
.
A plan showing site conditions at the time of our exploration,
locations of borings, and geologic data gathered during this
study.
6
Go
IGC. 743 Bergschrund Drive . PO Boz 1725 . Crestlinc, CA 92325 . Phone &: Fu: (909) 338-5902
I
I
------- - ~
------- "'
RfY ROAD ~ ~ \ ---
~~,-:---~\,~
::::, ,",,' "':":,<~,~~
, ,'?C:~~':Z~ ~
--~::. j~--'
--____ -- (OS -
.~~. ...t\
>. at this site.
IWn-faUlted block of
I ous age covered by
~lelY to the bounding
.ugh.
tl Pauba mesas and
mnants of alluvial fans
t'lln later filled-in with
I.lluvial filled valleys
T' formation is
~I Ark.ose. It has a
7 and is composed
1oo1' h sandstone.
!i cene in age, and
glomerate Formation.
of I and is composed
5 edded, channeled
nal intervening cobble
I
Location of Test Pit
I
TP-3
t&er age continental
~!!'() are described as
! Id is composed of
'i~1I5 ,,'
V) _ ~ '
~ "-"u '-'f':iZ6SO---" ."" .,.'
f '100 " . ,
~ - - - - - - - - -p.l1J~I.... - - ~ - _ _ - ~ -
~llate Miocene age
n s a series of basalt
anta Rosa Basalt may
-tecula region these
I in age, and
II has a maximum
( nnedy, 1977). It is
Jdium and'coarse-
, Thin discontinuous
3 one are common,
Pebble and cobble
ntck clasts are also
~
-------- " lj;:' .' . .' 25-
\ ' ~ ' !!i .~I " '
\\~::u',u'::::~f;~;/l/.~ I (jr
?\~ --125 -----:_-- _ ,,_-.::~ :-:~~~ 130
-, -\ 1'''' -- --' 'u'" ~9
~ ..', ....~::>(f~t\P>'"
'-- ' ,'~";;> -- -- .
.~":~,
- - - - - - /, .-
~""
. __'/~'. .' ,,-c'
" . .-.
_ _ ~ _ / _." _ _ 0 . --
EXPLORATORY EXCAVATION
LOCATION PLAN
.
NORTH
FIGURE 2
ly: MIB
7
chrund Drive . PO Box 1725 . Crest1ine, CA '92325 . Phone & Fu (909) 338-5902
1
II (9) 338,5902
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
1
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
3.0 SITE DESCRIPTION
The subject site is located in the western Riverside area, a few miles north of the San Diego
County line. The area is situated about 25 miles from the southern California coast, and a little
over halfway between Los Angeles and San Diego.
The site has recently been cleared of vegetation; however, there has been no previous
development of the property other than improvement of Del Rey Road and associated utilities
adjacent to the street.
Topographically the site is situated on the northwestern flank of a northeasterly trending mesa,
between Rancho California Road and Del Rey Road. The site slopes gently toward the north at
ratios of between about four and six to one. Elevations on the property range from a high of
approximately 1,450 feet above Mean Sea Level (MSL), along the rear of southern property
line, to a low of about 1,405 feet MSL along the northern edge of the property adjacent to Del
Rey Road.
Minimal grading adjacent to the street during construction of Del Rey Road has created a two to
four foot cut slope along the front of the lot adjacent to the street. Topsoil and slopewash soils
overly the bedrock beneath portions of the proposed residence.
Drainage of the lot is by sheet flow northerly onto Del Rey Road which trends northeasterly
along the northern edge of the lot. Runoff collected on Del Rey Road flows southwesterly away
from the site.
8
8
IGC" 743 Bergschrund Drive" PO Box 172S .. Crestline. CA 92325 . Phone &. Fu: (909) 338-5902
I
~
~I
1
i
-I
i
-I
i
i
-I
1
-I
i
1
1
1
-I
~
FFOM : Brachl!l'- IGC
PHOt-.E i'IJ. :la9 338 5:la2
Jan. 23 2\301 1214: 4:3PM Pi
40 o.II0LORIC CONDITIONS
The following ll8Ctionl summarize the regIonll and local geologic conditions II thll .lIe.
4.1 "eglonal Geology
The ,Ite .. WIthin the. Temecu18 BalIn, which Is on a portion Of a dOwn-faulted block Of
Me&o%olc plulonlc and metamorphlo baeement rocks Of Trlallic to Cretaceou. 1ge covered by
Cenozoic to rec:ent continental sedlment. (Mann, 1955).
The Temecula !nln has a Bomewhat triangular .hlpe corresponding cIoIIly to the bounding
f8ulll that form the stNctural basin at the louthem end of the Elsinore trough
The TemecuIa Besln, and the llIe, is defined by the tow rotllng relief of the F'euba mesas and
gentle ellwllll filled valleye and pIllin.. These melal ant ectuaUy the remnant. of aUuvllll fanll
formed during Plei&tOcene time, that were first dl.sected and eroded, then Ieter fIIIed.in wlth
more recent Nd1mentI and now appear IS gentle roiling hills and broad lllluvlal filled valleyt
and pt,ln..
Bedrock Ixpoaed In the region conslatl prtmarily of Cenozolo and younger age continental
.adlmenla. The following geologie units (listed In order of decreaalng age) are dtllCrtbed as
felOWl:
. Mlrtlnez FOftIIItIoft: This forrn8tlon Is Paleocene In age and II compol8d of
alkOM8 lInd arkoelc arav"'.
. Santa Ro., BUIlt: This formation hili been datad I' In Miocene age
(Kannedy, 1977). Interoalated between aedimentllry forrnlltlonl is I llrieI of bIuIt
ftowa known e8 the SlInta Rosa Basalt. In acme ate.. the Stinta ROI. Bnatt may
be .. much lIB 100 feet thick; however, where found In the Temecula reglcn theM
betllt8 _ only a few ten. of feet thick.
. Tamlcull ArkOll: Thill fOrmllllon Is Upper Pliocene In age, and
unconformably overliee the Santi ROBI Bllllt. The formation 11M 8 maximum
preuNed thlckne.1 of approximately 1.650 feet lit P8Chang. (Kennedy, 1977), It iI
compolllld plirnarily of pall glHlllsh-yetow, well-lndul'lled, mldlum Ind coerse-
grU1ed sandstone bed. thlll avel1l88 approximately 3-fllt thlck. Thin di8COntI'lUOus
beds of f1M-grllned tulfaceou. sandstone, siIllItonl, and cIeystone .,.. common,
and locally Interbedded with the malllve sandstone beda, Peoble and cobble
conglorneme inlefbed8 compoted of IoClllIy derived basement rock cI8IItlI _ allO
common, rangilO up to tnree f8/tt in thlckn....
. Unnamed IIndlton. and Conglomll'lta Fonnltlol'l: Thill formalion II
P1eIItDclena In 8ge, Ind unconformably overlies thl Temecuta Amae, It hee I
mlldmum thlckn8t8 of approxIm8lely 250.feet (Kennedy, 19m end's compoeed
mottly of pile greenlsh-y.tIow, medium grained, friable, callche-rich 8andstone.
. PlUM Fol'lllltloft: TIle Paube Formation 1& Upper Pleistocene in age, l!Ind
unoonformebly overlie. the Unnemed Sandaton. and Conglomerate Formation.
The PsubS Formation h8II an expoeed thlckn... ollbout 250.feet and II composed
of (1) a light-brown, moderately well-lnCMeed, extensively cron-beckled, channeled
and filled .andllone and slltatone f8cies that contIl". ocoasioll81 intervening cobble
~
10e .. ,..t "..........4 Otiu .. PO ,,,,) 1115 . r.,...~litlO, c^ taUs .. PlIUII*. JI.. ("lftll.:-,.,i"- --
~
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
and boulder conglomerate beds and (2) a grayish-brown, well-indurated, poorly
sorted fanglomerate and mudstone facies (Kennedy, 1977).
. Recent (Holocene) age Alluvium: The Recent Alluvium consists mostly of
moderately well sorted, poorly consolidated sand and silt, with interspersed lenses of
pebble and cobble conglomerate.
4.2 Site Geology
The site is located on the northwestern flank of a finger of the dissected Pauba mesa, between
Rancho California Road and Del Rey Road. Gentle relief at the transition defines the site where
the mesa remnant, underlain by Pauba sandstone, slopes down to the alluvial filled valley
along Del Rey Road.
A moderate to thick layer of topsoil consisting of at least 36 inches of organic rich, brown Sandy
Clay to Clayey Sand was encountered on the natural slope and covers nearly all of the site.
The topsoil layer was found to be very loose to blocky and porous.
Slopewash andl or residual soils were found to underlie the topsoil on the flatter portions of the
lot near Del Rey Road. The slopewash andl or residual soils were absent in Test Pit No. 1 but
were found to have a combined thickness of approximately 5-feet in Test Pit NO.3. Slopewash
soils were found to consist of brown, medium dense, fine to coarse Clayey Sand, which was
poorly consolidated, slightly porous and contained roots andl or animal burrows.
Bedrock underlying the site has been mapped as a portion of the Pauba Formation of Upper
Pleistocene geologic age. Bedrock was encountered in all three of the excavations at depths of
between three and eight feet below the existing ground surface (bgs). As encountered at the
site, bedrock consists of fine to coarse-grained interbedded and cross-bedded, brown, yellow-
brown, and light gray, friable sandstone with thin interbeds of dark gray siltstone and claystone.
The bedrock was found to be slightly to moderately weathered and friable, but was generally
dense._Geologic conditions are presented on the Exploratory Excavation Location Plan,
FIGURE 2, the Regional Geologic Map, FIGURE 3, and the Geologic Section, FIGURE 4.
4.3 Ground Water
Groundwater was not encountered within the excavations to the depths explored of up to 15
feet beneath the existing ground surface. Groundwater is not expected to be a concern during
or after construction at this site.
10
\f)
IGC. 1-43 Bergschrund Drive. PO Do:! 1125 . Crcstlinc, CA 92325 . Phone & Fu (909) 338~S902
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
......--;---,.~...
~:-., .'-"
i,/> . .'. " ./}"t
f \'1:-' . <>r... '" .;1:.-'-,-----,;-.-...
-w.-.....'" ,_,'_." 1't,,~--$ ,pd'" ". .."
~~>- ; .~-:.-;..
. i>,){~~~;r..-:......
:01'"
...~ ..
/
.,,~. ~~'...J'-~~-:"'",
, .'.....,.""",,~
~':"J41n '
4'
~:tt. >-
v 'rr' ~
J/' '), ,',',~:
h' , .,,? ~:"
".. ~ "', '/:,,"'~/'
, E: J. "/~v_;""'~'. / 1Il,~ 10-: ~
~J' ' '5 4.
:'~~i: /:~:~\O' .'. ',-,(!':,, .~""~~~ ";w/'~: r;;,;<"
7'''-' " ':., <~~ '-. .'.,~, <:~: )~,', "'''':<A~ ,1;';
... , ~^ ^,';_ ,~f "tfd. "L,~ h'<' ' .liIIiJit(~<~
" '~" '<"~I ,'- ." .' >,j,,'t' " ,t,
- .....:~.. "."'-:.---" '. .-,.,.I:::'.?/.~~~F>:~~~;.;, ",.', ;' ~~i~~~..:.-i::;~:.....\f"-'
dv ...,""~ .d':., ',", ,
. . t" iIi" .-. ,.,."<;i<:?-,,,;,.!o' /~"",' ~.it,,'
,.-./ 'II..' ~ ::, T/"'in1.;~V:::C: ".~~ +~
..-.- ,'~' <:._;~, w ,~~"""'~~~>~ ~~ m ~~
T emecula Region
Temecula, California
REGIONAL GEOLOGIC MAP
NORTH~
FIGURE 3
Scale: REDUCED
By: MIB
11
\\
Ice. 743 Bergschrund Drive . PO Bos: 1725 . CrestJine, CA 92325 . Phone & F8.J: (909) 338-5902
I
1
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
<( I
o
..!\
-
I
II
~
I
II
N
I
o
<i
,-
""
. . '.'[
'. "'/"1. I'
. . . .
'. I
..i: .(
\ . I
,\,; :/). ,.
\:. I "
"'{,.i:::' ,
../. .
~. r:.~
~~ ,J' :
~ ~ J C\J
. ~ ,
~ ~ ~. '.
^'J
I ,
,. ,
I J
\ ~\':"
.1 .,
\ I ~'
\ .. ~, ,
~,
\
..to;-
\
,",
,
o
...9
\Z-
~
-
\)
N
<(
GEOLOGIC SECTION
Scale: REDUCED By: MIB FIGURE 4
12
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
5 0 FAULTING. SEISMICITY AND HAZARDS
5.1 Faulting
The site is situated in a seismically active region of southern California. Surface ground rupture
along active fault zones and ground shaking can represent primary or direct seismic hazards to
structures and slopes. At the site there are no known active or potentially active faults trending
toward or through the property and the site is not within any currently designated State of
California Alquist-Priolo Special Studies Zone. The nearest major active faulting occurs along
the Temecula segment of the Elsinore Fault Zone, which is located approximately 2.4 miles
southwest of the site. Based on this, it is considered unlikely that surface fault rupture will affect
the site; however, moderate to severe ground shaking will be a direct seismic hazard for this
site.
Other faults which could impact the site include: the San Jacinto Fault Zone, 22 miles northeast;
the Newport-Inglewood Fault Zone, 30 miles southwest; and; the San Andreas Fault Zone, 48
miles northeast.
5.2 Seismicity
Historically, earthquakes of Richter Magnitude 6.0 or greater have occurred all around southern
California. These include the recent Hector Mine earthquake (Mw 7.1), the 1994 Northridge
earthquake (Mw 6.7), the 1992 Landers and Big Bear earthquakes (Mw 7.3 and Mw 6.4
respectively), the 1971 San Fernando earthquake (Mw 6.6), and the 1933 Long Beach
earthquake (Mw 6.6). Additionally, there have been numerous earthquakes of 5.9 or less that
have occurred throughout southern California on a regular basis.
A deterministic analysis of the maximum credible earthquake (MCE) and associated seismic
parameters for various nearby faults was performed. Based on Boore et. al. (1993) Random
Mean Method with one Standard Deviation attenuation relationship, a maximum credible ground
surface acceleration of 0.34g should be expected at the project site due to an earthquake of
moment magnitude 6.8 associated with the Temecula Segment of the Elsinore Fault Zone,
which is located approximately 2.4 miles from the site.
According to the 1994 Uniform Building Code (UBC), the proposed site is situated in Seismic
Zone 4. Major damage can be expected within this zone when earthquakes corresponding to
intensities VIII or higher on the Modified Mercalli Intensity Scale occur.
5.3 Seismic Lateral Forces For Above Grade Structures
To evaluate the base shear of above-grade structures due to seismic lateral forces as per the
California Building Code (CBC, 1998), the geologic subgrade classification will be Sc in
accordance with Table 16-J. The site seismic coefficients are:
Ca = 0.44, Na = 1.1
Cv = 0.75, Nv = 1.3
13
\~
IGC. 743 Ber&:schnmd Drive. PO Box 1725 . Crestlinc, CA 92325 . Phone &. FlU: (909) 338-5902
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
5.4 Secondary Seismic Hazards
5.4.1 Induced Flooding
Earthquake-induced flooding includes tsunamis (seismic sea waves), seiches and failure
of manmade reservoirs, tanks and aqueducts.
The site is not close to any bodies of water and due to the lack of nearby tanks,
reservoirs or other aqueducts, the potential for any of these hazards is considered
unlikely.
5.4.2 Induced Landsliding or Rockfalls
The site is located on gently sloping, terrain within an area of the county which is
expected to have a low susceptibility to landslides. Based on the nature of the materials
observed, gross stability of the hillsides appear satisfactory. Additionally, there are no
rocks or boulders, which pose a threat to the site from rockfalls.
5.4.3 Settlement and Subsidence
The entire site is underlain at depth by dense bedrock material; however, surficial soils
exist in portions of the proposed structure. Loose topsoil, slopewash, and residual soil
materials may be susceptible to seismically or hydraulically induced settlement,
subsidence, differential settlement, or lateral creep if left in place beneath footings or
piers. Therefore, remedial overexcavation of these soils is recommended during
grading of the site.
5.4.4 Soil Liquefaction and Settlement
Liquefaction is defined as the phenomenon by which a saturated soil mass suffers a
significant loss in shear strength under undrained cyclic loading. The loss in shear
strength is due to a rapid increase in pore pressure within the soil, which greatly reduces
the effective confining stresses. During earthquakes, cyclic loading during ground
shaking causes such an increase in pore pressure. When ground shaking is strong
enough and of sufficient duration it may result in an increase in pore pressure equal to
the effective overburden pressure of the soil and failure occurs.
Based on our observations and laboratory data, bedrock underlying the site is not
susceptible to liquefaction.
14
\'\
IGC. 143 Bcrgschrand Drive. PO BOI: t72S . Crestline, CA 92325 . Phone &: Fax (909) 338-5902
I
1
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
6.0 CONCLUSIONS AND RECOMMENDATIONS
The following sections contain our recommendations for general site grading and remedial
earthwork, and recommended design parameters for foundations.
6.1 Summary
Based on the results of the field exploration, it is our opinion that surficial topsoil and slopewash
soils are porous and poorly consolidated to depths of between three and five feet below existing
grades across the site. In their current condition, these materials are not suitable for support of
traditional foundations, slabs, or compacted fills. Based on this, we recommend that topsoil,
slopewash, and residual soils be over-excavated to competent bedrock and be replaced with
compacted fill.
Groundwater is not expected to be a factor during or after construction of this project.
Recommendations are presented below for general site excavation and grading requirements,
fill placement, allowable bearing capacities for foundation and retaining wall design.
6.2 Foundations
Proposed structures and/or retaining walls can be supported on continuous strip andlor isolated
spread footings. Continuous and isolated spread footings should be at least 12 inches wide
and should be embedded at least 12 inches below the lowest adjacent grade of interior and
exterior footings. Footings should be founded entirely in competent bedrock or on at least 12
inches of compacted fill. Laterally" such fill should extend at least two feet and five feet beyond
the edges of interior and exterior footings, respectively.
For shallow spread footings founded on compacted fill or competent native weathered bedrock,
an allowable net bearing capacity of 2,500 pounds per square foot (pst), may be used for
design. Allowable bearing capacities listed above may be increased by 130 psf for each
additional foot of depth, to a maximum allowable capacity of 3,500 psf. The recommended
maximum value of the net bearing capacity is based on a maximum allowable settlement of 0.5
inch.
All footings founded in competent native bedrock or compacted fill should have a minimum set
back of at least five feet from "daylight" or nearest adjacent slope surface.
The allowable net bearing capacity is defined as the maximum allowable net bearing pressure
on the ground. It is obtained by dividing the net ultimate bearing capacity by a safety factor.
The ultimate bearing capacity is the bearing stress at which ground fails by shear or
experiences a limited amount of settlement at the foundation. The net ultimate bearing capacity
is obtained by subtracting the total overburden pressure on a horizontal plane at the foundation
level from the ultimate bearing capacity.
The net allowable bearing values indicated in the report are for the dead and frequently applied
live loads and are obtained by applying a factor of safety of 3.0 to the net ultimate bearing
capacity. If normal code requirements are applied for design, the vertical bearing values may
be increased by 33 percent for short duration loading, such as loading induced by wind or
seismic forces.
15
../
,\ ':)
IGC. 743 Bergschrund Drive . PO Box 1125 . Crcstline. CA 92325 . Phone &: Fu (909) 33845902
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
6.3 Lateral Earth Pressures and Resistance to Lateral Loads
Lateral earth pressures and resistance to lateral loads are estimated by using on-site or
imported material with a minimum total unit weight of 120 pounds per cubic foot (pet), cohesion
of 600 pounds per square foot (pst), and an internal friction angle of 24 degrees.
Lateral loads can be resisted by an allowable passive earth pressure of 250 pounds per foot of
depth for dense natural bedrock or compacted fill applied against below-grade wall elements.
The allowable passive earth pressure indicated above is obtained by applying a factor of safety
of 1.5 to the ultimate passive earth pressure. Due to the low overburden stress of the soil at
shallow depth the upper one-foot of passive resistance should be neglected unless pavement
or a slab confines the soil. The maximum passive pressure should not exceed 2500 psf. In
addition, a friction coefficient of 0.35 between the concrete and the soil can be used in
combination with passive earth pressures to resist lateral loads. The coefficient of friction
should be applied to net normal loads only.
6.3.1 Permanent Retaining Walls
Permanent retaining wall systems, if used, should be designed to resist lateral pressures
as illustrated in Figure No.5, Permanent Retaining Walls. These pressures assume a
level ground surface behind the wall for a distance greater than the wall height. If water
pressure is allowed to build up behind the walls, the active pressures should be reduced
by 50 percent and added to a full hydrostatic pressure to compute the design pressures
against the wall
6.3.2 Retaining Wall Drainage
Positive drainage should be provided for all proposed retaining walls. As shown in
FIGURE 6, Retaining Wall Drainage, a drainpipe consisting of 4-inch, perforated pipe,
with the perforations down should be encased in a zone of nominal Yz to %-inch drain
gravel. The gravel zone should be wrapped in a non-woven geotextile material such as
Mirafi 140N, Supac 4NP, or equivalent.
6.3.3 Retaining Wall Backfill
Backfill should be compacted to at least 90% of the laboratory maximum dry density.
Observation, probing, and testing should be performed to verify compaction, and the
design values for internal friction and cohesion.
6.3.4 Seismic lateral Forces for Above Grade Structures
To evaluate the base shear of above-grade structures due to seismic lateral forces as
per the California Building Code (CBC, 1998), the geologic subgrade classification will be
Se in accordance with Table 16-J, The site seismic coefficients are:
Ca = 0.44, Na = 1.1
Cv = 0.75, Nv = 1.3
~ \b
IGC. 143 Ber&schruad Drive . PO Box 172S .. Crcstlinc, CA 92325 .. Phone & FBI (909) 338-5902
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
PERMANENT RETAINING WAllS
q (Surcharge)
Seismic
H,
\
T
~
"0. Po --J
I
~
l~
Pp --I Pq
p Pq + Po
= 0.5q .;. J5 "
O.5q + 45 "
Pp = 250 Hz ~ 2500 psI
Pe 15 H,
I' = O,J5
(350 pSI minimum :( I~~' thon 350 pst)
- octi..e earth ;sr~SSlJre (Cantilever walls. level r Jund)
- active earth pressure (Restrained walls. Ie.' ".l0d)
poss;ve eorth presSure
- seismic eorth pressure
- allowable friction c.......c;:ltic: 1t
.!;Qlti;
1. All values of height (H) in feet. pressure (P) and surcharge (q) in pounds per squQre fOOl (pst).
2. Pp, Po, and Po ore the passive. active, and ot-rest eorth pressures. respectively' Pe is the incrementol sl'!ismic
eorth pressure; Pq is the incrementol surcharge earth pressure; and Jl. is the allowable fric:ti.Jn coe(f:,,:ie.,t,
applied to dead normal loads acting on non-pile supported elements.
J. For restrained walls (not free to rotate). use at-rest (Po) earth pressure; increase Pe by 30 per::erl~
4. Sase friction coefficient (J.I.) cnd Pp include 0 safety factor of 1.5.
5. Neglect the upper 1 foot for passive pressure unless the surface is confined I:>y (I pavement or slob.
6. Surcharge load only applys the upper 10 feeL
7. Pe calculated by using a horizontal ground acceleration of 0.34g.
8. Drainage system should be provided for the retaining wall.
9. for lromc surcharge, assume 0 lOO-psf uniform pressure along the top 10 feet.
10. Earth pressure aSSume no hydrostatic pressure. If hydrostatic pressures ore allowed to build up. the incrementol
earth pressure below the groundwater level should be reduced by 50 percent and added to hydrostatic pressure
fOf total laterol pressure.
PERMANENT
Scale: NOT TO SCAlE I
RETAINING
WALLS
I I
FIGURE 5
BV: HHC
17
\\
IGC. 143 Bergschrund Drive. PO Box 1125 . Crestline, CA 92325 . Phone & Fu (909) 338-5902
I
!Iesentative site
e are placed as
If reevaluated.
ImoerviOU3 5011
T
12-incn minimum
J6-inch maximum
L
JCilitate surface
Indations at a
, s if possible.
) into subgrade
'Ie foundation
inage device
. ent excessive
I
"',1'/ >I "J 1/-
.. ""'.. ,. '" '" 1'1
'" . . .......,..,. ,/ ),11/::::
" ". " ... " " " ". ~v~
////////A'>:%"
/"./"//.../~~
////////,,~~
'" " " ,. " ... " ... ,,~::.<:.
"///////~"
/////".//~...-<<
....,/"
:t"'~~O~Qo~-;:!:<"<""
o:o~o:)"'o,):;::Y)\:"
0:)0 0 .3 0',0
0'" 0:)0"'.."'; 3"'>::::
0'" Go.:! '" .;Jo~~
0;'.:1 :)o"'o;",~,
o ;) 0 0 "':I'" '" '" '" ..
:) 0 :):) 00 ~
0:'00",000 ~"
o:t 03 0 0 0 '" .Y s>~
o "" .:l ./A"
00 00 o"'~o~>>
O~O:)",O:)'3:l o~/,
oO~2_'nc~ ~:u~y~
- :nu\t",um, ~ <..V~
" 1:1 .:10,):) ~..,/>~v
0"'" 00 3,)"'3V~"'/
0')0:000 Q"",.:a;..:S: 7
00 :.0 ",0 ~ :<...<...'<
00 030~3 v~>>
. Q,,'" G,,:I ",\.(:'(/,,<
o .)3..:l_ .~o~>>
"'X..<..,<
'. .~>>
. (,,</~
. .' ' ~~
. . : . ~0:~'
~%~~%%%%%~~~~~%~
(~...:'<<~,,~,'<t{..~..::.:<<--' b b. .( A'</.("'</.<.-....:/<'-:~,
'/,,'yo''' "
(crproolinCiJ
Orain rock (3/4").
l:scment woU
I'll bulk sample.
.. The results
31 soils are not
1struction of the
J~metals.
1.tes that the
/ieefJ holes
Perl orated ;lioe. qrOvity
drained. hOles Co....nwcrd
4-incn diameter (minimum)
Not to Scale
11 significant in
l~al effects on
r.equire more
neer should be
I
.Od( ean be replaCed with an -equivalent. drainaqe gcoc:amposite
, c:onnecte<d to perforated pipe.
" <Wld/or crain pipe sho<Jd be ilstaled at the base of the waIa.
I
ones protected from cloggi '9 with the use of synthetic fabric:
'" nalI..raI soi and the ctain rock may be used.
I
I
Bv: HHC
FIGURE 6
I
I
WALL
DRAINAGE
I
18
\~
'.43 Bergschrund Drive. PO Box 1725 . Crestline, CA '92325 . Phone & Fax ('90'9) 338-5902
131'02
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
6.4 Settlement
The settlement of structures supported on strip andlor spread footings founded on soil will
depend on the actual footing dimensions and the imposed vertical load. Most of the footing
settlement at the project site is expected to occur immediately after the application of the load.
Based on the maximum allowable net bearing pressures of 3500 psf, as presented above,
settlement on the order of 0.5 inch should be anticipated. In order to evaluate differential
settlement, data on the relative dimension of adjacent footings, magnitude of imposed loads,
and distance between footings is needed. In the absence of such data, and based on our
experience on similar projects for similarly loaded footings, the differential settlement may be
taken as equal to about half the total settlement.
6.5 Modulus of Subgrade Reaction
For the subject project, design of the structures supported on subgrade prepared in accordance
with the recommendations provided in this report may be based on a soil modulus of subgrade
reaction of (k.) of 300 kips per cubic foot (kef).
6.6 Slab-on-grade
Structural design elements such as thickness, reinforcement, joint spacing, etc., for the slab-on-
grade should be selected based on the analysis performed by the structural engineer
considering anticipated loading conditions and the modulus of subgrade reaction of the
supporting soils, as presented above.
All slab-on-grade should be underlain by a six-mil Visqueen (or equivalent) moisture barrier.
The moisture barrier should be covered by approximately two inches of sand to minimize
punctures and to aid in curing of the concrete. Minimum reinforcement of 6"X6"- #101 #10,
welded-wire mesh, or equivalent, properly centered within the middle of the slab, is
recommended. As indicated above, structural design may require greater thickness andl or
reinforcement.
The site soils have a low expansion potential (EI=22), subgrade soils for concrete slabs and
foundations must be firm and un-yielding, moisture-conditioned to approximately 120 percent of
optimum moisture content prior to placement of concrete.
In hot weather, the contractor should take appropriate curing precautions after placement of
concrete to minimize cracking of the slabs. The potential for slab cracking may be reduced by
the addition of fiber mesh to the concrete andl or control of the waterlcement ratio.
Joints for concrete slalH>n-grade must be carefully designed. Joint spacing is dependent upon
slab thickness and concrete properties and should be selected by the structural engineer.
Concrete should be cured by protecting 'it against loss of moisture and rapid temperature
change for at least seven days after placement. Moist curing, waterproof paper, white
polyethylene sheeting, white liquid membrane compound, or a combination thereof may be
used after finishing operations have been completed. The edges of concrete slabs exposed
after removal of the forms should be immediately protected to provide continuous curing.
19
V\
IGC. 143 Bergschrund Drive . PO BOI: 1725 . CrcstIine. CA 92325 . Phone &: Fu (909) 338-5902
I
I
--I
-I
-I
I
1
i
-I
I
i
1
I
-I
-I
-I
-I
FROM : Br.eher-IGC
F'HCN: H:l. ~ 338 533'2
Jan. 23 2001 "4: 44PM P2
The above ~mm.ndatlonl8!8 baMd on the rHUltI of t8S1s performed on representative site
soils. If lIOils other thin thole pr8Mntly encountered with1n the project alte are pltlced It
tltructul'll Ill! within the building PD, the modulus of aubgradereactlon should be reevaluated.
The final dea'gn should be bned on the ICtIllI modulus of subgrade reaction.
6.7 Bite DraInage
Surfaces Idjecent to foundation. and retaining weDs should be designed to facllftate surface
runotr and pl'fl\lent ponellng of wiler. Surfee& gl1ldes should slope away from founcl8llon8 at a
minimum grade of 2 percent in peved areas and up to 4 pe<<:ent in other areas If pouIbIt,
Areae edJaoent to retllnino W8Ie ahould be detigned to minimize water InfiftlllUon into subgr8de
eolla and e proper drainage syatem should be Incol'l)Orated into the design of the foundetlon
and retIllnlng wab. In particular, we reoommend thllta paved 'V-dlteh" type of dreinllgll dill/ice
be provided along the mr of tile lItructUnl to provide 8deq~ drainage and prevent excesalve
InftlrIltion Of fUnoIl' water Into the baokftl BOI behlnd retlining w8lI1l.
6.8 8011 Corr08lvlty Evaluation Teata
Calsclence Environmental Laboratory, Ine., Glrden Grove, CalIfornia telled one bulk aemple.
The tHtilg ineluded minimum fWIIstMty, pH, soluble sulfltH, and chlofide conlent. The relulta
lire included In Appendix S, laboratory Oeacrlptlons and Teat Reautts.
The lulf8le content d the sol was 90.1 mgI1tg (ppm), which indiclIIes that the site soIIB are not
deleterioul to oontlete. Type I or II Portland Cement Ill8Y be used for the conltNollon d the
foundlllona.
The Chloride coment wn , Q6 mglkg (ppm) and ie mOderete1y corrosive to fell'OuI metal..
The Ammonium NltI1lle contem of the temple telted was not detected, which fI'ldlCltes thllll thl
lite soh are not dalelllrloua to copper pipe,
The pH value of the 8011 WIS 7.7. ThIs range or pH 1& slightly alkallne and is not slgnlllclnlln
evaluating llOIl OOIl'OlMly.
The acope of thlt study WllllmMeCI to an evaluatton of sol corm.lvlly and it8 genellll ell'ectll on
m8leriall Mkely to be IlI8d for constr\lction of the subject project. II enginee,. require more
speclflc informBtlon, design, spec\ficBtiont, Of del/gn review, II coll'OBlon engineer should be
cOnluhld.
.
.
20
~GC'";""'o~.t...... nrin . .'PO-~'in5 . c""u... CA .i335' ;'fboa.. p*, (9Oij'"ii.~,iij--
1-0
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
6.9 EARTHWORK
Remedial overexcavation of the site is recommended to remove near surface soils to
competent bedrock. The following general guidelines should provide a basis for quality control
during site preparation and remedial grading. It is recommended that all structural fills be
placed under our observation in accordance with the recommendations presented in the
following sections.
6.9.1 Clearing, Grubbing and Removal of Unsuitable Materials
Areas to receive compacted fill or which will support driveway or parking area pavement
should include the following site preparation work:
1. Stripping and removal of vegetation, organics, loose dumped or
undocumented fill, and other debris to competent soil.
2 Removal of unsuitable materials within all structural areas should
extend to competent native soil or bedrock and at least 12 inches
beneath proposed footings.
3 If grading creates transition pads (where a cutlfill contact traverses the
building pad), then the cut area and, if necessary, the fill area should be
overexcavated to provide a uniform thickness of compacted fill a
uniform thickness of compacted fill of at least 24-inches. See Figure TL
in the appendix.
4 Lateral removal of unsuitable materials should extend at least a
distance equal to the depth of removal, or at least five feet beyond the
limits of fill or edges of exterior footings.
5 Localized areas of removal deeper than those recommended may be
encountered during grading.
6 Side walls of excavations deeper than 4 feet should be sloped as
recommended in section 6.3, Temporary Slopes.
7 Site grading may be accomplished with conventional heavy-duty
excavation equipment. However, grading behind any structure or wall
should be performed using lightweight construction equipment to avoid
over-stressing the walls.
8 If kept relatively free of organics and other debris, excavated soils may
be processed and reused in compacted fills.
9 The Geotechnical Consultant shall observe and approve all cleared
and excavated areas prior to placement of compacted fill.
21
z..\
Ice. 143 Bergschrund Drive . PO 80:1 1725 . Crcstlinc, CA 92325 . Phone & Fa (909) 338~S902
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
6.9.2 Processing of Natural Soils
Prior to placement of compacted fill processing of the in-situ soils should include the
following items:
1.
Scarification of all subsoils (after recommended removal of
loose soils) to a depth of 6-inches.
2.
Moisture conditioning of the scarified soils, by increasing or
decreasing the soil moisture as necessary, in order to provide a
uniform moisture content at or slightly above optimum.
3.
Compaction of the scarified and moisture-conditioned soils to at
least 90% of the relative compaction as compared to the
laboratory maximum density determined by ASTM 01557-91
The end result of processing procedures should be a firm and unyielding surface prior to
fill placement.
6.9.3 Fill Placement
Fill soils should be placed in accordance with the following procedures:
1
Fill shall be placed in controlled lifts, with lift thickness modified
as necessary to achieve satisfactory compaction. The
thickness of compacted fill layers shall not exceed a maximum
allowable thickness of 8-inches. Each layer shall be compacted
mechanically to a minimum relative compaction of 90 percent of
the laboratory maximum as determined by ASTM 01556 or
equivalent.
In transition areas there should be at least 12-inches of fill,
compacted to at least 90 percent of the maximum density,
beneath footings.
Beneath driveway, park.ing area pavements, and other f1atwork.
the upper 12 inches of the fill shall be compacted to at least 95
percent of the maximum density.
2
Fill soils shall consist of excavated, on-site, non-expansive
granular soils or imported soils approved by the Geotechnical
Consultant. Imported soil shall be granular and relatively non-
expansive as defined by the Uniform Building Code (UBC)
Standard 29-2. Rocks larger than 4-inches in dimension shall
not be used in structural fill areas.
22
z;z.-
IGe. 743 Bergschrund Drive. PO 80:1 1725 . Crcstlioc, CA '2325 . Phone &:. FlU (909) 338-5902
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
6.10 Slopes
Slopes constructed at the site should be graded in accordance with the following specifications:
Proposed fill slopes and slopes cut in soil, should be constructed at ratios no steeper than 2:1
(horizontal to vertical).
Proposed cut slopes within bedrock are considered stable in their current configuration and
constructed at ratios of 2: 1 (horizontal to vertical).
A key is required at the toe of all fill slopes. Fill keys should be founded at least 2 feet into
competent material and should have a minimum width of 15 feet unless otherwise
recommended by the soil engineer. See detail on Figure FK in the appendix.
Additionally, where fill will be placed on sloping ground, with slope ratios equal to or steeper than
5:1 (horizontal to vertical) after removal of unsuitable soils, keying or benching of the natural
slope is required. See details on Figure FK in the appendix.
To maintain proper drainage and erosion control, the ground surface adjacent to the top-of-
slopes should be designed to drain away from the slopes. Berms should be constructed to
prevent drainage over the top of slopes and brow ditches should be constructed along the top
of cut slopes to intercept runoff from adjacent up-slope areas.
6.11 Temporary Slopes
Temporary slopes may be constructed with gradients as presented below in Table 2,
Temporary Slopes.
Table 2 Temporary Slopes
Ot04
vertical
>4 (within loose surficial soil)
1 to 1
V. to 1
Surcharge loads should not be allowed within 5-feet from the top of cuts or inside a line drawn at
forty-five degrees from the toe (bottom) of the excavation, whichever results in a greater
setback. Where there is insufficient room for sloped excavations, shoring should be used. All
applicable requirements of the California Construction and General Safety Orders, the
Occupational Safety and Health Act of 1987, and the Construction Safety Act should be met.
The soils exposed in the cut slopes should be inspected during excavation by the project's
geotechnical consultant so that modification of slopes andlor required remedial excavation can
be made if variations in he soil conditions occur.
23
22>
IGC. 743 BcrglChrand Drive . PO Boz 1725 . Cresdine, CA 92325 . Phone at. FBI (909) 338-5902
I
1
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
6.12 Shrinkage and Subsidence
Shrinkage and subsidence factors for the on-site materials have been estimated for design
purposes. Based on our field and laboratory tests and observations, it is estimated that
shrinkage of between 10 and 20 percent will occur for the loose topsoil and slopewash
materials, if removed and replaced as compacted fill with an average relative compaction of
approximately 92 percent. Subsidence of approximately 0.1 feet may also be anticipated during
construction activities at the site.
Although these values are only approximate, they represent a "best estimate" of changes in
bulk cubic yardage which will likely occur during processing and surface grading.
6.13 Excavatability
Findings to date show that the materials, which underlie the site, range from loose topsoil to
dense friable sandstone and are generally easily excavated utilizing conventional heavy-duty
earth-moving equipment.
6.14 Construction Observation
The soil bearing values and foundation recommendations presented in this report are based on
the assumption that all footings will be founded entirely on compacted fill or within competent
bedrock. Slabs and other f1atwork. should be placed on compacted fill material approved by this
office. Site grading operations should be performed under observation and testing by our
personnel.
7 0 CLOSURE
This report was prepared for use by our client and their designates in cooperation with our office
to be used in the design of the proposed project. We cannot be responsible for the use of this
report by others without observation by our personnel. The contractor must draw his own
conclusions regarding specific construction techniques to be used on this project.
The findings and recommendations presented in this report were prepared in accordance with
generally accepted professional principles and practices in the fields of engineering geology, soil
mechanics and foundation engineering. We make no other warranty, e~her expressed or
implied. The scope of services for this investigation did not include any environmental
assessments, testing or monitoring of soil or water, beneath or adjacent the site.
Our conclusions are based on the results of our field reconnaissance and exploration combined
with an interpolation of soil conditions between borings and existing exposures as discussed
within this report. If conditions are encountered during construction which appear to be different
than those indicated by this report, this office should be notified.
Respectfully submitted,
INDEPENDENT GEO-ENVIRONMENTAL CONSULTANTS
MIB:HHC/rk
Enclosures; Appendices
Doc.01012-GTI
24
2-4\
IGC. 743 Bcrgschnuad Drive. PO BOI 1125 . ere.tliDe, CA 92325 . PhoDe &. Fax (909) 338.5902
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
APPENDIX A
25
Ice. 743 Bcr&;lchrnnd Drive . PO 801: 1725 . CrestJinc. CA 92325 . Phone &: Fax (909) 338~S902
2--5
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
APPENDIX A
FIELD EXPLORATION
Exploratory excavations for this project included excavation of three test pits to depths of up to
15 feet below existing grades. The approximate locations of the exploratory test excavations
are shown on FIGURE 2, Exploratory Excavation Location Plan, in the report. The soils were
logged by our personnel and classified by visual examination in accordance with the Unified soil
Classification System (USCS) shown on the following page.
Relatively undisturbed samples of representative soils were obtained by driving a stainless-steel
split-spoon sampler into the desired soil using a slide hammer. The sampler was lined with
brass rings, 2.5 inches in diameter and 1.0 inch in height, which retained the soil samples for
recovery. Soil samples obtained from the sampler were then carefully logged, trimmed, labeled,
and enclosed in c1ose-frtting waterproof containers for transport to the laboratory. Bulk samples
of the representative soils were also collected from the soils excavated for classification and
analysis in the laboratory,
A-1
26
2J.e.
Ice. 7.f3 BcrtS'chl'lUld Drive . PO Bo% 1125 . ereS'tliac, CA 92325 . PhoDe &: FBI (909) 338.5902
I
1
I
. --
COARSE.GRAINED SOILS FINE.CRAINED SOILS
lESS rHAN 50% FINES. MORE THAN SO% FINES.
GROUP DESCRIPTION MAJOR CROUP DESCRIPTION M"lOR
SYMBOLS DIVISIONS SYMBOLS 01'0'1 IONS
Well-GRADED GRAVelS OR GRAVEL. INORGANIC SilTS, VERY FINE SANDS.
CW SAND MIXTURES, lESS THAN 5% FINES Ml ROCK FLOUR, Sll TV OR CLAYEY FINE
GRAVELS SANDS SILTS
CP PooRLY.GRADED GRAVelS OR GRAVEl. More thIn half INORGANIC CLAYS OF LOW 10 MEDIUM ANO
SAND MIXTURES, lESS THAN Sow. FINES ofcolfselractlon Cl PLA.STICtTV, GRAVEllY CLAYS, SANDY ClAYS
isl.rlerthln CLAYS, SILTY CLAYS, LEAN CLAYS Uquidlimit
SilTY GRAVelS. GRAVEl.SAND.Sll T leuth.nSO
CM MIXTURES, "-'ORE THAN 12% FINES No.' ORGANIC SILTS OR ORGANIC 5ILTV.clAY5
sieve size Ol Of LOW PLASTICITY
CC CLAYEY GRAVElS, CRAVEl.SANO-CLAY
MIXTURES, MORE THAN 12% FINES INORGANIC SilTS, MICACEOUS OR DtA-
MH TOMACEOUS FINE SANDS OR SILTS,
WELL-GRADED SANDS OR GRAVELLY ELASTIC SILTS SILTS
SW SANDS,lESS THAN 5% FINES ANO
SANDS CH INORGANIC ClAYS OF HIGH PLASTICITY, CLAYS
SP POORLY-GRADED SANDS OR GRAVELLY MOf~th.nh.rf FAT CLAYS LiClvidlim'1
SANDS, LESS THAN 5% FINES ofCOoirufr.ctlon moreth.nSO
issm.lIerth.n OH ORGANIC CLAYS OF MEDIUM TO HIGH
SM SILTY SANDS, SAND-SILT MIXTURES, No.4 PLASTICITY
MORE THAN 12% FINES si~v~ Sil~
PEAT, MUCK, ANO OTHER HIGHLY HICHLY
CLAYEY SANDS, SAND-CLAY MIXTURES, PT ORGANIC i
SC MORE THAN 12% fiNES ORGANIC SOILS SOILS
NOTE: NOTE:
::oarse-grained soils receive dual symbols jf Fine-grained soils receive dual symbols if their
they contain S to 12% fines (e.g. SW,SM. limits plot in the hatched zone on the Plasticity
;P.GC,elC.) Chart (ML,CLI
SOIL SIZES PLASTICITY CHART
:
'"
COMPONENT SIZE RANGE . /'
\0
BOULOE RS ABOVE 11 m flNE.GR"INED SOilS /'
COBBLES Jm 1012in "sonNE fRACTIONQF CH
~ rO"RSE.(;RAINED SOilS ./
w '"
0 ./
CRA Vel No 410Jm. ~ /'
Co.arse v'm 10Jm >
~ J.
G .~~
Fine No 4to Y. in ~ Cl
< 10 ..
SAND No 20010 NO <I ~ V
~ MHtOH
Coarse No 1010 No 4 I. Ml-Clj ./
Medium No 4010 No 10 'r- ML&Ol
'r-
Fine No 10010 No 40 . ML L... I
. 10 10 JO '" \0 '" 7. eo '" "
'fINESISiltorCt.y) BelOW No 200
LIQUID LIMIT
NOTE:
Only sizes smaller than three inches are used
to classify soils.
~ Unified Soil
ssification System A-2
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
2-1
IGC 0 743 Bergschrund Drive 0 P.O. Box 1725 0 CresUine, CA 92325 0 Phone & Fax (909) 338-5902
I
I
I
TEST PIT LOG TP-1
Date:10/25/00
Excavation Width: 24 ~
SunaceConditlons:
TP-1located in the southam portion of the proposed development area,
.in the vicinity of1l1e cut slope.
I
Surface Elevation:
E ui ment Backhoe
Pro'ect: 01012-GTI
Lo ed B : MIB
Drivin Wei ht Slide-Hammer
I
I
I
I
2.5
I
5.0
I
7.5
I
10
I
I
12.5
I
15
I
I
I
I
I
G
r
a
TOPSOIL: Clayey SAND, hard, blocky, dl)' to slightly damp, dark brown
And porous with fine roots.
BEDROCK: PAUBA FORMATION
Sandstone with interbedded Siltstone & Claystone.
Interbedded Sandstone units several feet thick. Units range from fine to
Coarse grained, 8M to SP, dense cross-bedded, moist, brown, yellow-
brown, and light gray.
Contains Siltstone and Claystone interbeds 2 to 4 inches thick.
Very stiff to hard, brittle, and fractured, dark gray with FeD staining.
B: N 50W; 3SW
J: NS; Vertical
J: N 20W; 83 SW
TOTAL DEPTH 15.0 FEET.
1). No Groundwater
2) No Caving
3 Test Pit backfilled with excavated soils
A-3
28
28
I
IGC. 743 Bergschrund Drive. PO Boz 1725 . CrestJine. CA 92325 . Phone & Fu (909) 338-5902
I
I
I
D
e
p
I
h
TEST PIT LOG TP-2
Dale: 10/25/00
Excavation Width: 24-
SurfaceCollditiOl1.:
TP'210"",ednea'theeemral portion of the propo~# development erea.
Pro'ect: 01012-GTI
Lo edB: MIB
Drivin We! ht: Slide-Hammer
I
Surface Elevation:
E ui ment: Backhoe
I
I
TOPSOIL: Clayey SANDI Sandy CLAY, hard, blocky, dry to slightly
damp, dark brown, and porous with fine roots.
I
I
5.0
Slopewashl Residual Soil: to
Clayey SAND, fine to coarse, medium dense, moist, brown,
Slightly porous.
I
111.6 14.7
7.5
BEDROCK: PAUBA FORMATION
Sandstone with interbedded Siltstone & Claystone.
Sandstone units range from fine to Coarse grained, 8M to SP, which are
dense cross-bedded, moist, brown ellow-brown, & Ii ht fa .
I
TOTAL DEPTH 8.0 FEET.
1). No Groundwater
2) No Caving
3 Test Pit backfined with excavated soils
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
A-4
I
29
~
I
IGC. 143 Bcrgschnmd Drive. PO Box 1725 . Crestline, CA 92325 . Phone &: Fu: (909) 331-5902
I
I
TEST PIT LOG TP-3
Date:l0/25/00
Excavation Width: 24"
Surface ConditiOnS:
T;,.3located ,nearthe.rear orwe$;tend, of the proposed development area,
I
Surface Elevation:
E ui men!: Backhoe
I
S
a T
M
o
i
U
S
C
S
G
r
a
p
h
i
c
I
I
I
2.5
I
110.2 10.8
113.2 7.9
5.0
I
7.5
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
Pro'ect: 01012-GTI
Lo ed B : MIB
Drivin Wei ht: Slide-Hammer
TOPSOIL: Clayey SANDI Sandy CLAY, hard, blocky, dry to slightly
damp, dark brown, and porous with fine roots.
Slopewashl Residual Soil: to
Clayey SAND, fine to coarse, medium dense, moist, brown,
Slightly porous.
Becoming dense
BEDROCK: PAUBA FORMATION
Sandstone with interbedded Siltstone & Cia tone.
TOTAL DEPTH 8.5 FEET.
1) No water .
2) No Caving.
3 Test Pit backfiRed with excavated soils
A-5
30
30
I
IGC. 143 Bergschrund Drive . PO BOl: 1725 . Crcrtlinc, CA 92325 . Phone & Fu (909) 338-5902
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
APPENDIX B
31
IGC. 7.3 Bergschrund Orive . PO Box 1725 . Crcstlinc, CA 92325 . Phone &. Fu (909) 338-5902
~\
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
LABORATORY TEST DESCRIPTIONS AND RESULTS
Moisture-Density Tests
The dry unit weight and field moisture content was evaluated for representative samples.
Results of the moisture density tests are presented on the excavation logs.
Compaction Tests
Representative soil samples were tested in the laboratory to determine their maximum dry
density and optimum moisture content by ASTM 01557. The test procedure uses 25 blows of a
10-pound hammer falling 18-inches on each of 5 layers of soil placed in a 1/30 cubic foot
c Iindrical mold. The results of the test are resented below:
TP-1
4-8'
.....
Maximum Dry
. .... Density
".Ibs/cubic fL
126.5
.....--........... . ...... .
.. .... .... .. -.-. -.
. Optimum Moisture content
(%) .
11.0
Direct shear Tests
Direct shear tests were performed on undisturbed ring samples in accordance with ASTM
03080. The samples were saturated, drained of excess moisture, and tested in a direct shear
machine of the strain control type. The machine is designed so that the test is performed
without completely removing the sample from the brass ring. Results of these tests indicated
that the soil has a cohesion of approximately 600 psf (pounds per square foot) and a friction
angle of 24 degrees. Results are plotted on the enclosed Shear Diagram (Plate S-1).
Consolidation Tests
Settlement predictions of site soil's behavior under load are made on the basis of consolidation
tests. A one-inch high sample is loaded in an increasing geometric progression and the
resulting deformation is recorded at selected time intervals. Porous stones are placed in
contact with the sample (top and bottom) to permit addition and release of pore fluid. The
sample is inundated at a selected load during the progression. Results are plotted on the
enclosed Consolidation-Pressure Curves (Plates C-1 and C-2).
Soil Corrosivity Evaluation Tests
Soil Corrosivity testing was performed on the on-site soils. The evaluation included testing the
soil for pH, minimum resistivity, Soluble Sulfate, Chloride, and Ammonium Nitrate content.
Actual lab data sheets for the tests are included at the back of this section.
· The pH value of the soil was 7.7.
. Sulfate content was 90.1 mglkg (ppm).
. Chloride content was 105 mg/kg (ppm), and
. Ammonium Nitrate was not detected.
32
~
IGC. 143 Bergschrund Drive . PO DOl: 1725: . Crcstlinc. CA 92325 . Phone &: Fes: (909) 338-S902
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I)
t:.J\r'AI\j;) IUI', II~UC.^
I l:'J I
Jell fJOr.l9
Job N?
Depfh
4- 8
SCI:l~lo:: NQ
locotj'on
-17>- I
Sr::~;:;JIE:' To;"en By
Tested By _
Dote
120
, ' 1\ , --. --' ., ' - r--'-
Trial N2 I ;:> ::,
.. -- .-.- . - . - n_ .. .. .. , .. ..I~__n. .,
'1 -- .. ... - ' , " - , .. "'P. ..---
- , .. - - - - - -- - , .. .. Water Added
, ' , , .. 570j'
, \ , - Wt. of Soil + Ring I'
, - - - ~ ., -
,
.. , -, -.. r
.. ' , , Wt. of Ring 17Ll 2
! - - - i ..
, -- Net Wt. of Wet Soil
I
I S u u i i - I ,
.. \ Foetor
Wet Density Ibs/cu.ft. , 2,t).O
- Dry Density Ibs/cu, It. . me...Bl I
MOISTURE DETER,Y11 N A T!Ocl
.. Tore N~
Wet Wt. of Soil-l- Tore 254.\ !
Dry 'lit. of Soil r Tore 2Jo.~ \ I
Net Wt. of /,Ioislure Loss i I
Wt. of Tore I 1
,
.. Net \'It. of Dry Soi I I
.!
- - Moisture 010 of Dry Wt. 10,? 1 I
..
- '\ f
, .. , .. - - . Degree of Soturotion 01. 50'7 l
.
- ' , - - .. - ' , - - - - -. - -- EY-PANS I ON /.1EA3U~EMENTS
..
- Surcha rg e Load = p5 f Rock N2
Dote Time 6 Time Dial Deflec"J
/!'OZ. '1;4$ 15'l.4
5'> /5H.
I~ ,
,
Q;5C, IS44
'& ;.0...,) (762-
- Dry Density pef Vile
,
, .. ' Degree of Saturation 010 z,,-
E.1.
1"0
/30
;-:
"-
:J
U
" 110
(f)
CJ
..J
:z
>-
f-
l') 100
z
w
o
>-
a:
o
90
80
70
o
~w
20 30
DRY WEIGHT
W Yd
s=
62.4 - 0.37 fd
10
/,jOISTURE AS % OF
~;:lll CJ051ificoflon
!.l;':.;?d 01 Compoction
P::rc,:,nf of PO''llnQ
>CA"O~ ~i,-I C PAL \6 ~a"""<.\' '6.;::>D...J^.)
2.70
Sp~Cific Grayi~y
Croup Symbol
3/1 "
NI? '1
?b
CO~lSULT[NG rUUtlvATION ErlGIN::E:.HS t\ E!\:Ll:"lEER1~JG C::OLOGI STS
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
"
ii
o
1
2
.....
:::
C)
u
;...
C)
l::.
Z
o
......
E-<
-<
~
......
~
o
[fJ
z
o
u
-.
-
-,
-~
t--
0.1
. ;
!
,
,
, ,
,
,
-'-
T
!
, -,
,. -1
,'-, ,
.
! I
,
I , ,
I , ,
~~
, I
! ,
, ,
, ,
,
.f--,
: ,
j'l
+
I
, ,
'.~
: I
I
.~ ;. ::'1
..~--;-~ I
~
,
, ,
,
, I,
I
,
-f-L' ,
I
: !
, ,
, ,
, "
, ,
, ,
, ,
I : I
, "
"
" ,
0.5
1.0
I , ,
, ;
'"
r J
, ,
, ==r
, ,
i I
!
I
I
,
,
, '
r: : ~
,
"
;'~
, ,
:=:I
,
, . ,
iIl
, .
,
, ,
,
, ,
, ,
,
: ,
I ,
I ,
, ,
, r
i I;
,
,
, ,
,
, ,
, ,
; i
I I i
, ,
,
I
r'
, ,
-
! I
,
I ;~
: . I
: -.I
, ,
,
,
I I ,
I
,
: ,
1-1,-
, ,
j !
i :
~ t 1
-,
,
, ,
,
"
I
,
, ,
~~
i I I
, I
,
, '
~l=
, ,
: I I ~
; i I
: : :-t
, ,
. ,
t !
, ,
, ,
,
I : !
, ,
, , ,
I i I
, ,
, ,
, I I
I 1 : ;
, ,
,
I i I ;
I
I , ,
I
, ,
I
5
50
10
LOAD kips/sq. ft.
CONSOLIDATION GRAPH
A Independent
W.. GeO,-Enyironmental
.~..:,Consultants
SAMPLE:
TP-3
BY:
PROJECT NO.:
e.
3f+.
DATE:
Y\
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I'
1
1
I
, ,
I
, ,
,
,
, I I
-'- ,
,
! , I ,
, i
I
I
1
I
1
I
I
1
I
I
1
I
I
I
I
I
I
1
I
5000
4000
S
H
E
A 3000
R
S
T
R
E
N
G
T
H 2000
p
s
f
1000
o
o
1000
2000
3000
4000
5000
NORMAL PRESSURE. psf
Boring No.: TP- 2 Depth(ft): 5.5
Soil Classification: SILTY SAND (SM): brown.
Dry Density(pct): II\.6 Moisture Content(%): 14.7
Internal Friction Angle(degree): 24 Cohesion(pst): 600
Note:
PROJECT: MIKE BRACHER - 01012 JOB NO.:
California DATE:
@ Converse Consultants
?ft:;
DIRECT SHEAR TEST
00-81-170-07
11113/00
Drawing No.
B-1
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
1
I
I
I
1
I
I
I
1
I
I
I
r:E::-.~ 1-:200Z '.',: 29
CALSC I E~'~'=
-
C a/science
Environmental
~
I. aboratol'ieS, InC.
ANALYTICAL RepORT
centrum Analytical Laboratories, Inc.
P.O. Box 8127
Recllards, CA 92375
Date Sampled:
Date Received:
Date Analyzed:
Attn: Marilu Escher
RE: Temecula/17510
All concentrations are reported in mg/kg (ppm).
WorK Order No.:
Method:
Page 1 of 1
Samole Number
Sulfati
CancentratiDn
#1
Method Blank
90.1
NO
NO dMates not detected at indicated reportable limit.
? 14 894 7'501 i-'. ~,;~o-
: 11120/00
, i 2101/00
· 12102/00
oP-12-0010
EPA 37S,4M
: Reporting
Limit
40
0.1
:
E<r...h sample was reC6ivild by eEL chilled. intact, and with chain-of-custooj- attacned,
Aw~
7+40Llncolnway,Gardef1G'OV9,CA92841.1432 . TEL:(714)8!J5..~94 i. FAX: (714)894.7501
I
.
'01
4
1
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
1
1
I
I
1
I
1
I
I
- ---.. ~.....' -~~.-
~eC-11-20Dcl :7:23
CALSCIENCE
--
"",..
-..~/sc;Bnce
I:",nvironmental
Laboratories, Inc.
ANAL YilCAL REPORT
-
~14 894 ,:;.01 ?,~3/<lt>
Centrum Analytical Laboratories. Inc.
P.O Box 8127
Red'ands, CA 92375
A1tr\: Marilu E:;cher
RE: T emeculeJ1751 0
All concentrations are reported in umohms/cm,
Date Sampled:
Date Received:
Date Analyzed:
Work Order No.:
Mitt-,od:
Page 1 of 1
11120/00
12101/00
12/02/00
00-12-0010
EPA 120.1M
~Ie Number
Resistivity
CQnc:entration
#1
000071
eaCh sample was received by GEL chilled, Intact, and with chaii'\-af-eust~ attachea.
~fl
144C Lincoln Way, GanJ,," Grove. CA 921141-1432 . TEL: (714) 695-5494! . FAX: (7141654-750'
i
~
I
I
1
General Chemistry
I
Clj~nt
FT3je~t.
Jet '\Ie"
Matr]x;
;"'i12IYSt
IndE!p:md~,t G~o-En\'jronmentai
Temecula
",7510
Soil
TLP-
DatI! Sampled:
Date R!;ceived:
~ '11101CO
1112710C
I
I
Analysis:
pH
,""eti:od Nurnber:
Sample ID
S045
pH Units
i
.,
I
-.
!
I
,
1111
I
\
,
,
I
\
\
i
\
I
I
I
"
i
7.7
1
I
1
1
. ....'..
...., ,',,'"
, "' ,.; .~" . . ..
I
I
I
i
IO.IOdO. Limit.
,
j03te An3iyz.ed:
!oc Batch # :
4.0-',2.5
I
:!2fQ1/QC.
904580340
1
Page 1 of 1
I
31\
1
I
1
1
1
1
I
1
I
I
1
1
1
1
I
1
1
I
I
1
DEC-~1-2~0 i?:2e
CALSCIEN:E
-==.
L'" alsc;ience
"'-
If. nvironmentaf
..
Laboratories, Inc.
ANAL vnCAL REPORT
Centrum Analytical Laboratories, Inc.
P,O. Bcx8127
Redlsnds, CA 92375
Artn: Marilu Escher
RE: Temeo.da/17510
All concentrations are repo:ied in mg/Kg (ppml.
Samole Number
Chloride
Conc;ntration
#1
Method B\arlk
105
ND
Date Sampled:
Date Received:
Date Analyzed:
Work Order No.:
Method:
Page 1 of 1
NO denotes not detected at indicated rellOrtabie limit
714 894 7:;"')1 F. 04/1d'::.
; 11120/00
; 12/0',/00
, 12/04/00
oj:l-12-0010
SM 4500Cl-C
. ReportinQ
: !J!ni1-
10
2
Each sample wa. received by eEL chilled, intact, and with chain-of-eust~ attached.
NJ.A~}J. 7440 Uncaln W2Y, Garden Grove, CA 92841-1432 . TEL: (714)89;;'5.494' . FAX (714) 894-7501
Af>
I
I
1
I
1
I
1
I
1
1
1
I
I
I
I
I
I
1
1
DE::-11-200~ 17:29
~:ALSC 1 E~...E.
: 14 'B94 7501 F . !,1~;~C-
~-
-s
~science
--;-
It:~nv;ronmental
LabOratories, Inc.
ANALYTICAL REPORT
Centrum AlIalytical Laboratories, Inc.
P.O,6ox8127
Redlands, CA 92375
Date Sampled:
Date Received:
Dale Analyzed'
11120100
12/01/00
12/01/00
Attn: Marilu Esche:r
RE: TemSlcula/17510
All concentrations are reported in mglkg (ppm),
Work Order No.:
Method:
Page 1 of 1
00-12-0010
EPA 350.2M
Samole NMIDQ"lf
ArmlOnia-N
Concentration
! Reporting
. JJ.mli
#1
Method Ble.nk
NO
NO
5
0.1
NO denotes not detected at indicated reportable limit.
Eacll sample was received by eEL chilled, intact, and with chain-of.custo~y attached.
~hJA
I
7440tincclnWay,G.ard""GrtT.re,CA92841-1432 . TEL: (714! 89&-64941, . FAX: (714) 894-7501
I
A,\
I
I
1
I
I
I
I
1
1
I
1
1
I
I
I
I
1
1
1
APPENDIX C
FAULT MAP
AND
GENERAL GRADING SPECIFICATIONS
A,'L-
I
I
1
1
I
I
I
I
I
1
I
I
I
I
I
I
1
I
I
~--
-' ..
>;~~. . . ''it
". .,.
. '"
"'4
"A.
Reference:
National Geographic Society
Washington D,C., April 1995
Scale; 1 ;250000 (Reduced)
FAULT MAP
.
By; MIB
NORTH FIGURE FM
IGC . 743 Bergschrund Drive. P.O. Box 1725 . Crestline, CA 92325 . Phone (909) 338-5902 . Fax (909) 338-5609
A.'?::>
I
1
1
I
I
I
I
I
I
1
I
1
I
I
I
I
1
I
I
COMPETEHT MATERIAL
Toe OF SLope SHOWN
ON GRAOING PLAN
- MINIMUM HEIGHT OF BeNCHes
--------j /1' . . . . '. 'l~t ~NS!~pe~~rv ~e ASSOllREi~~:
~/... ~'_Y.Ai'/.oC?4' '~1'1
2' MINIMUM. I
KEY OEPTH.c .
KEYWAY IN COMPETENT MAT. MllIlMUlI r TILT BACK
J ERIAL MINIMUM WlOTH OF 15 OR 2% SLOPE
PU.CE COMPACTEO FEET OR AS ReCOMMENoeo BY (WHICHEVeR IS GREATtil)
BACKFill 10 ORIIi- THE SOil ENGINEEiI. KEYWAY
INAl GRACe MAY NOT BE REQUIReO IF Fill
SLOPE IS lESS THAN S" IN
HEIGHT. AS RECOMMENoeo BY
THE SOil ENGINEEiI.
NOTE;
8ENCHING SHAll SE REOUIRED
WHEN NAllJRAL Slopes ARE
EOUAl TO OR srcEPeR THAN 5: 1
OR WHeN ReCOMMENoeo BY
rHE SOil ENGINeE..
TYPICAL FILL OVER NATURAL SLOPE
Project No. Date: By FIGURE fK..
A,Pr..
I
I
I
I
1
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
1
I
I
CUT LOT
t\l1\~l G1\~OL -
1I~ _-
- -- :\:It ~
/ ~~l1\\~l
. . 'COI.l~A~D' '.: . :. '.f: :
:.-; FILL /:1
. '. : .:.'. .' :'.' '. ~~m~~wTE ANO
\L r;Ql.lpmNT MATERIAL ACCE?TABLE
;0 THE SOIL ENGINEER
-
-
-
-
.----
-----
~-"
-'
-1
3' MIN..J-
CUT FILL LOT (TRANSITION)
.Gv.~
~Ilv.y
""...... -"
.........
:.C~.i;D ;,:: ::;Sdi0:> . .
. .' '. : ..:...:-.......-:- . ~"~\{?-,,,1. ....~. ..... .
~.~ .': :/:,W-\..' .
. ". /.;,~. .
'.' ...... .;;-1<::.: .:
.' ..
. ...
.~.. E
.0:.".. . '. 'COMPmNT llATE;!lAL ACCEPTABL
TO THE SOIL :~GINE:R
-1.
r
3'l.llN..J
'OWER OVEREXCAvAnON MAY BE
RECOMMENDED BY THE SOil ENGINEER
IN STEEP TRANSITIONS.
TYPICAL OVEREXCA VA TION OF
DAYLIGHT LINE
Project No. Date: By FIGURETL
t6